Legal Opinion

In Re Mattingly

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided March 4, 1999No. 98-BG-646PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

The Board on Professional Responsibility has recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for thirty days, with reinstatement conditioned on his cooperation with the disciplinary system. The recommendation stems from the Board’s determination that respondent violated Rule 8.4(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct by failing to respond to Bar Counsel’s inquiries regarding a 1995 complaint brought against respondent by a client, * and also failed to reply to an order of the Board on Professional Responsibility requiring him to respond to the 1995 client complaint. See…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In Re GoldsboroughDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In Re BellerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
  2. In Re MattinglyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
  3. In Re SteinbergDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. In Re AbrahamsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
  5. In re SpitzerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API